Transcript 2nd October 2012 Phoenix House, Melton

2nd October 2012
Phoenix House, Melton Mowbray
The National Context
Andrew Pritchard
Director of Policy & Infrastructure
2 October 2012
Introduction
UK plc – some long term trends
 The Failure of Regional Policy?
 National Infrastructure Planning
 Impact of ‘non-spatial’ policy decisions
 Conclusions

Regional Productivity
Productivity per Employed Person (1993 & 2008) by Region
160
Index (England = 100)
140
120
1993
100
2008
80
60
40
NE
NW
Y&H
EM
WM
EE
London
SE
SW
Population
Growth



All areas are growing
It is just that some
areas are growing
quicker than others
These trends seem to
be becoming more
not less pronounced
over time
Job Growth
Average Annual Net
Job Creation
Total Net Job
Creation
306
10,100
Midlands
18,748
618,700
South
82,830
2,733,400
North
Figures 1971-2004
Graduate Retention
Graduate/Earnings Relationship All TTWAs
(inc London)
Average Weekly Full Time Wage
(£) 2003
650
y = 8.3647x + 292.28
R 2 = 0.5372
600
London
Basingstoke
550
500
Dudley &
Sandw ell
GB
Craw le
Derby
Peterborough
Birmingham
Glasgow
450
Cambridge
Southampton & Aberdeen
Winchester
Loughborough
Walsall &
Wolverhampton
Guildf ord and
Aldershot
Cardif f
WM
Oxf ord
Bristol
Manchester
Brighton
Edinburgh
York
Barnsley
Doncaster
400
Stoke
Hull
Carlisle
Tyneside
Belf ast
Sw anse
Liverpool
350
Middlesborough
& Stockton
300
10
15
20
% Graduates (2001)
25
30
Sources: NES 2003, Census 2001
The dominance of London





London is at the hub of a ‘south east mega city
region’ (Prof Sir Peter Hall)
Has its own unique governance settlement
A Regional Spatial Strategy (aka London Plan)
Massive public investment (Crossrail,
Thameslink, Olympics = £30 Billion)
Building more houses now than back in the
noughties…
The Failure of Regional Policy?



Previous Labour Government focussed on
regions and RDAs, underpinned by PSAs
RDAs required to raise economic performance
in all regions, but could directly only influence a
very small amount of total investment
Coalition policy a mix of sub-regional (LEPs) &
national competitions (RGF) – but has even less
money to play with
‘Understanding Local Growth’
(BIS /DCLG 2010)
Spatial pattern of development a result of
globalisation, economic liberalisation and
free trade
 ‘attempting to act against these forces is
unrealistic and unsustainable’
 …in a modern, economically liberal
European state in the first half of the 21st
Century

“ time and tide wait for no man”
National Infrastructure Planning



2008 Planning Act introduced a new single
consent regime for major infrastructure projects,
underpinned by a series of (mostly non-spatial)
‘National Policy Statements’
IPC merged with PINS by Coalitition– but basic
system retained
Coalition has also published 2 versions of a
‘National Infrastructure Plan’ (it even has map!)
National Infrastructure Plan
40 key projects covering roads, rail
airports, ports, energy communications,
water and sewerage and ‘local
infrastructure’ (RGF & GPF)
 A mix of public and private investment
 To be underpinned by £40 billion of
investment guarantees (subject to
legislation)

Is it enough?



The National Infrastructure Plan presents a real
opportunity to shape the future development of
the UK in a conscience way
However, it currently little more than the some of
its parts with no relationship to the traditional
planning system
‘Non-spatial’ policy and investment decisions
have a much greater spatial impact than
traditional regional policy
Some questions





Why is the spatial distribution of defence
spending and transport investment?
What will be the spatial impact of welfare
reform?
Why are most civil servants and Government
Departments based in London?
What would the regionalisation of public sector
pay do to regional GVA?
What is so wrong about the BBC moving to
Salford?
Conclusions




Long term patterns of economic divergence very
hard to shift
Conventional ‘Regional Policy’ has so far failed
to fundamentally change the situation
National Infrastructure Planning does present an
opportunity to shape rather than respond to the
future
However success will depend on how it is
aligned with ‘non-spatial’ decisions and the
planning system
Infrastructure Challenges for
the East Midlands
Andrew Pritchard
Director of Policy & Infrastructure
2 October 2012
Introduction
Background
 Some good news!
 Some bad news!
 Managing flood risk
 Super fast broadband
 HS2 in the East Midlands
 Conclusions

Map
East Midlands: Some Key Facts






4.48 million people - and growing fast
1.9 million dwellings - growing fast until the
banking crash!
153,000 businesses
£81 billion of GVA (2010)
Highest proportion manufacturing employment in
the UK (13.3% - £12.4 billion)
High productivity sectors: transport equipment,
food & drink and construction
Some good news!



£800 million investment
in MML announced by
DfT in July 2012
Councils, LEPs, MPs
and businesses all
singing the same song
Intervention of BIS in
highlighting the direct
and wider economic
benefits was crucial
Some bad news!



EM has lost out on
funding for affordable
housing & regeneration
since 2010
Government does not
appear to recognise the
potential of the EM
(TAFKAAR)
Fragmented nature of
the EM makes it difficult
to articulate a case
Flood Risk


EM has the largest
proportion of land at
risk of flooding (17%)
of any region of
England
Not just a coastal
issue – many inland
urban settlements
also at risk
Within flood risk areas….
over 350,000 people and140,000 homes
 a large proportion of the nations best &
most versatile agricultural land (producing
a third of England’s vegetables)
 some of the region’s most dynamic urban
economies, including central parts of
Derby, Leicester, Nottingham, Lincoln &
Northampton

Maintaining investor confidence



Current EA investment program includes over 20
schemes in the EM – including Boston Barrage
and along the River Trent in Nottingham
However, climate change continues to ‘raise the
bar’, capital funding has been cut and EA are
looking for 3rd party contributions – even in
coastal areas
Meanwhile, the Government has yet to conclude
deal with the ABI on maintaining access to
commercial insurance in flood risk areas…
Broadband



Broadband is now the
‘4th Utility’
‘Super fast’ broadband
now the industry
standard (2Mbps)
Government objective
is for 90% to have
access to ‘super fast’
broadband by 2015
Broadband & economic growth



ICT is linked to improved business systems, ecommerce and design and innovation
Studies have confirmed that increased
broadband penetration can have a significant
(and quick) GVA uplift – plus 3.8% in East
Midlands (£2.4 billion)
However it is clear that the market will not
deliver super fast broadband to everyone –
particularly in more rural areas and some
deprived urban communities
Delivering S/F broadband in EM



BDUK made £34 million available to local
partnerships in the EM to full the gaps left by the
market – but it has to be matched
ERDF has been used elsewhere – but currently
outside the remit of the EM Operational
Programme
Lincolnshire has particularly poor S/F broadband
access (more the 75% of households without) –
but a greater need for economic diversification
than most
High Speed Rail



HS2 Phase 1 route from
London to Birmingham
confirmed
Preferred route from
Birmingham to Leeds,
including EM Station to be
announced ‘shortly’
First Hybrid Bill 2013 and
construction from 2017
onwards
HS2 in the East Midlands



Huge potential if direct & wider economic
benefits can be captured and the environmental
impacts mitigated - but we need to get it right
Released classic rail capacity could transform
rail service provision across the East Midlands –
but an integrated approach is needed
Wherever a station is located in the East
Midlands, it will have long term impacts on
economic geography, housing markets and
commuting patterns that we will need to plan for
An EM HS2 station must:




be accessible to a number of key population
centres within the East Midlands;
be well integrated with classic rail and other
public transport services;
(together with the line of route) minimise &
mitigate adverse environmental impacts; and
maximise economic growth & regeneration
potential at both a local and strategic level,
without undermining existing urban centres
Conclusions




flood defence funding, rebalancing the economy,
integrating HS2, insurance premiums, super-fast
broadband, affordable housing, food security, RGF,
ERDF - does it all add up in the EM?
(Fill in your own answer here!)
EMC & partners attempting to stitch things together
– but a more strategic approach is needed
Could a ‘Map for England’ help?
Join in a national debate with
the Royal Town Planning Institute
Research Findings: University of Manchester
Individual government departments have over 100 maps
relating to policies and programmes
• 100 maps in 95 different places
• Topics covered are:
• Economic growth
• Transport
• Communications
• Housing
• Environment
•
One third are explicit maps; two thirds are not
Why does this matter?
•
For the Public:
• Hard to tell how government policies affect your area
•
For Policy Makers:
• Hard to tell what the cumulative impact of government
policies is on an area
• National Infrastructure Plan
• Regional Growth Funds
•
For Business:
• Hard to tell how government policies will affect your
business
How does a M4E fit with Government Policy?
•
•
•
Open Data:
• The coalition agreement states that ‘we will ensure that
all data published by public bodies is published in an
open and standardised format, so that it can be easily
used by third parties.’
Localism Act:
• Government becoming an enabler of spatially aware
local decision making through the provision of data.
• More proactive than reactive
Business Clusters:
• BIS Supported
• Contrasting experience in the North East and South
West
Example
Map:
Regional
Growth
Funds and
Household
Growth
Example
Map:
Relative
Water
Stress
Levels
Example
Map:
Household
growth and
flood risk
Example
Map:
Regional
Growth
Funds and
Deprivation
Example
Map: HS2
and
Deprivation
What do we suggest?
• A website portal containing layers for each of the
key policies and programmes
• RTPI/IDOX Pilot launched TODAY
Some additional benefits include:
• Helps to boost growth
• More transparent
• Saves time and money
• Helps coordinate infrastructure across
national borders
Our Consultation process is ongoing…
• Should the government bring together these
maps in one place?
• What would the benefits of this approach be to
your organisation?
• What key policy areas should be covered?
• Have we missed anything?
What have we found out so far?
• Overwhelming support (95% surveyed) amongst
a range of stakeholders
• ‘grounded in common sense’
• ‘ensure regions receive [their] share of
funding’
• ‘visualise…spatial relationships [for] planning’
Map for England – what will it cost?
• Seeking support from government departments
to assemble maps (eg on data.gov.uk) or provide
basis for the Map for England
• Direct costs to the RTPI are limited to a Project
Officer and support from the communications
team
What happens next?
• Taking stock of consultation
• Seek to engender support from government and
stakeholders.
• You spread the word!
Want to know more?
• The study report and compendium of maps and
the pilot website are available at:
• www.mapforengland.co.uk